About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBCW 11
MSNBC 8
KNTV (NBC) 3
WRC 2
WBAL (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
directly at odds with house speaker john boehner. >> could you accept a deal that does not include tax rate increases for the wealthy? we've seen talk about a possible compromise that could leave rates the same but cap deductions for high-income earners. is that something that's acceptable? >> no. >> not at all no, way? >> no. the preponderance made it very clear in his campaign that there are not enough -- what you just described is a formula and a blueprint for hampering our future. you cannot go forward -- you have to cut some investments. if you cut too many you are hampering growth, you're hampering education, investments for the future. >> and even thousands of miles away it appears president obama is still focused on those negotiations. while touring a royal monastery with secretary of state clinton in thailand the president was overheard mentioning the budget talks to a monk. the president later clarified his comments -- >> he's not any monk. >> no. >> he has some big i vestments in the stock market. >> he later clarified his comments at a news conference. >> yes, we were working on
is there to do? the signals from john boehner, the speaker of the house, are that he's got some more leverage with his republican caucus than he had back in the day, and that there is talk of coming up with more revenue. maybe not calling it a tax increase, not a rate increase, but finding some way to raise some more money. >> right. you know, andrea, i hate to sound an optimistic note when it comes to politics, but i do think the signals coming out of john boehner's sort of world, and out of president obama's statement last week is that there can be some common ground here, that president obama, i think, clearly has some leverage due to what happened in the, in his own race, as well as at the senate level. so i think he has that. and then john boehner, i think a little bit more questionable in how much more leverage he has within his own caucus, but we shall see. if both of them can sort of say, look, let's do this, this is important to the country, let's move on, we can disagree about lots of other things, but we're going to compromise and move forward. whether that compromise is not raisin
. senate majority leader reid said they would work to come up with a deal deal. house speaker john boehner says house speaker john boehner says he thinks they will have a solution before the end of the year. >>> and there are new details about the woman, jill kelley, at the center of the scandal that brought down general petraeus. as nbc's andrea mitchell reports jill kelley's connections went beyond the social elite and tampa, all the way to the white house. >> reporter: jill kelley and her twin sister met at the white house, touring it on november fourth november 4th, two days be general james november 4th, two days before general james clapper, the director of national intelligence was even told about the petraeus scandal. jill kelley mentioned the visit in an e-mail, saying i was at the white house with my friends in the administration this weekend. the stress was surreal. white house officials say the jill kelley sisters were invited by a staffer who may have met at the air force base. jill kelley was bipartisan in her outreach, she and her sister dropped in on a fundraiser for marco
.6 trillion of new revenue. boehner had agreed to $800 billion. it's not hard to find $1.2 trillion as a kind of middle ground to that. then you want to have $4 trillion of total deficit reduction, so that leaves $2.8 trillion of spending reductions that have to happen. here's what people miss. we can avoid going over the cliff with the stroke of a pen. they can just extend all this stuff and kick the can down the road. the real question is are we going to have a big deal? are we going to agree on the major spending restraints that we need as well as the tax stuff in order to actually get the deficit under control? and i think the betting on that is less than 50%. i think we have a great shot at it. but it's going to be really, really hard. >> is that the view from wall street, too? they're not totally confident that this is going to happen? >> what you see in the stock market at the moment is that wall street is not totally confident. that's for sure. >> all right. steve, thanks so much. >> pleasure. >>> coming up, independent senator-elect of maine, angus king joins the conversation. he's a
party should take president obama up on his offer. you have speaker boehner saying, let's get compromise. this is the time to bring that debt down. we seriously have to do it. i don't think anyone disputes that, but it has to be a mix of spending cuts and the revenue. and the one figure that i'd like to add here is how much revenue we get by just going back to the clinton levels at $250,000 and above. that's $700 billion in tenures. that's what draws people to that number when you add that in and then close some loopholes and subsidies and do the budget cuts, we have already done a trillion. you can get to the $4 trillion that most economists say would at least lead us to the path to reduce debt over ten years. >> because it is so much money and because it would be so relatively painless for people who have income above $250,000 to see that change go back, because bill crystal is saying this now, because the president is clear that's what he's running on, it feels that's clear that's within the realm of the possible. but what else didn't previously peel like it was in the realm of possib
and the ongoing relationship with boehner and mcconnell because he's going to have to be a different kind of leader with them. he talked about it in the press conference a bit the other day. he needs to reach out to them the way he's reached out to people on staten island and dealt with the two governors, christie and cuomo, who are two pretty demanding guys as well. and based on their public and private comments have been very happy with the president's leadership and his government. >> i just wonder if it's fair to make a parallel when you look at the president's response to sandy which has had and continues to have just devastating effects on the economy for businesses and the reaction to the bp oil spill which seemed slow in coming because that was devastating as well to a different part of the country. >> he certainly was. he was very slow to respond to people in the gulf coast. >> in terms of appearances. >> i think things have changed, though, over the past couple years. and i suspect that, you know, even the president's closest allies will say that it was a very hard adjustment go
boehner. i mean they are the most important players as to whether we get a result. secondly, i've said from day one, i've been saying it for two years, the most important piece of this, andrea, really is medicare because as you look at glen hubbard, as you look at others talking about all these things, the two are intertwined. in other words, as we see true medicare reforms and you see a real solution to medicare, where people know that we've put this behind us and we've dealt with it, i think you see the dial change as it relates to revenue. so, you know, i've been discussing revenues now for at least two years. i do think republicans are open to revenues that are put in place and a pro growth way, but i think people want to see that we've actually dealt with the problem. we haven't generated more revenues without solving the fundamental problems we have and we have what we want to do is put ourselves on a path towards fiscal solvency. i think the key here really is, medicare and to the extent you dial that up and solve it, i think you also dial the other dial which is revenues and i
. >> there is agreement all around that boehner wants a deal. the speaker wants a deal, but he cannot sell a deal, even with the goodwill that he thinks he and the president have on that right now, unless there is real graham ruddman type, real requirements, that these things go in simultaneously. and that's what jim baker wrote about recently, who's had that experience, of fashioning exactly that kind of deal. >> it's important, though, that -- >> you have to cut spending in the future. >> you can raise taxes with one congress. but it takes five congresses to cut spending. >> it's important to keep the focus on growth. not taxes, not spending cuts. you know, the goal here is to get our growth from, you know, one plus percent, up to three and four percent. if we don't get growth going, none of this will matter at all. it's really important as the president frames this that he frames it as growth, and therefore i need this tax increase for these people. this kind of spending cuts here. because it will leverage this kind of growth. >> but that's new spending. that's what the president talks about, john,
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)